2024 E-Sports World Championships

It was stated recently (rumor not fact) that the UCI is considering ‘other platforms’ to potentially host the 2024 E-Sports Championships. Let’s consider the possible options and reasons.

Zwift positives:

  1. Zwift total subscribers and racers are higher than other platforms.
  2. Zwift has a proven track record of identifying ‘abnormal’ results.
  3. Zwift has created high quality courses for hosting races.
  4. Zwift has the support of many pro riders (although some are paid for their endorsement).
  5. (to be added as needed)

Zwift negatives:

  1. Zwift power-ups impact races negatively for viewers and racers.
    The use of anvils caused some to lose their positions as an avalanche was created.
    The burrito was ineffective, confusing to viewers, and the name is not as humorous as implied.
    Power ups have been around a long time and are still being ‘adjusted’, which implies that many
    racers find their use dissatisfying.
  2. Zwift drafting or pack dynamics are still being readjusted and do not replicate real life conditions.
    Drafting is still very weak in many situations.
    Pack speeds are abnormally high in large groups.
    Solo and small breakaways are almost non-existent in top level racing.
    The constant changes demonstrate that Zwift is still in flux and not satisfactory to many.
  3. Zwift equipment causes new racers to be handicapped with slower equipment.
    While some sponsored races equalize all equipment, it is often unclear what effect bike/wheel
    choice has.
  4. Zwift does not have a red Tron bike. Red bikes are essential to winning races. We all know that.
  5. (to be added as needed)
1 Like

Regarding some negatives…

I assume that if the UCI said they wanted no powerups in their events, there wouldn’t be any. Many Zwift races don’t use powerups.

Similarly with the equipment, if the UCI demanded in-game bike standardization, they would probably get it.

1 Like

I don’t see Negative #2 as being a negative. eSports cycling is its own discipline, and is starting to finally be regarded as such by the broader cycling community, including the UCI. While some amount of realism, especially for physics, is essential, I don’t see having a perfect replication of real-world conditions as necessary at all. And as a virtual platform, of course the system will need to be iterated on over time and adjusted where necessary.

1 Like

Curious, in what situations is the drafting weak? Nothing comes to my mind right off the bat. Do you mean it has weaknesses, which it does, or that it doesn’t provide enough strength?

1 Like

#1 and #3 are not really negatives they can easily be prevented for Esports worlds.

#2 with pack dynamics can be debated on but like others i don’t necessarily see zwift as trying to replicate irl. It’s more about enjoyment i look at zwift as another cycling discipline. Dynamics are improving i wonder if any other platform has it nailed down better with large groups of real riders

breakaways are tough really tough but improving. it’s also the nature of the racing being so short Zwift racing is more like crit racing.

{laughs in Bjørn Andreassen}


1 Like

One thing I’m curious about is why users of Zwift care about the UCI events. Compared to other things that Zwift could invest in that would make you a happy user, why is it important to spend time and treasure on these events? I see it purely as a distraction that takes resources away from what I want as a regular user and occasional racer. I don’t find elite events interesting to watch compared to some random streamer who is more like me. There is a tiny tiny fraction of Zwift users who will actually race these events. Why not invest all of those resources into product development, testing, cloning James, etc. and let some other platform take this on? Even if you prefer Zwift as a product for your own use, you’ll still be able to watch the events if they’re operated elsewhere, so no real loss eh?


Pretty much spot on, if they were used to innovate or kickstart new ideas you could see the logic, but they play it safe and dull then expect people to get excited about it.
In fact, it probably adds more pressure, you have to commit so much resource to ensuring nothing fails, it might be better off keep doing what they are doing and trying to move forward (failings and all)

sounds like a baseless rumour but if there is a reason for changing platforms its this: $$$$$$

I feel like Eric Min always pushed for UCI and Olympic events to legitimize Zwift as a racing discipline instead of just a “game”. I can see how that might be important to some investors, the events carry a bit of exceptionalism and help bring Zwift to the world stage. But as for us regular users… I don’t really care.

it would be nice if some of the semi interesting race concepts they came up with found their way into the regular game, but they never do.

1 Like

That doesn’t align with product development over the last 5 years. Many of the racing formats used in these events are not even supported natively in the game. I think the reality is that the UCI and Olympic events were targeted for : marketing. The company has been overtly marketing led, until now where it feels like there may be a swing.


The thing that would legitimize Zwift racing for me is investing in better (automated) tools for managing cheating in community races. Crack down on height and weight manipulation, detecting bad equipment, etc. Don’t rely on community reporting, especially when the non-transparent process deters reporting. Spend the time and money on fixing those issues instead.


Same could be said for the Zwift Grand Prix, experimenting with cool new formats to see what is possible/fun before deploying developers to spend time on it. I agree, this is just more marketing as I said it brings Zwift’s name to the likes of the world tour teams… which have tons of fans… more eyeballs on the product… it is basic marketing/product placement

Your probably right, the problem being, you need the general public to buy into it and accept what they see is accurate - With the non-committal to community racing over the years and it being seen as wild west, inaccurate trainers etc they lost that battle or atleast are massively playing catch up with peoples perception on the legitimacy of online racing.

They cant get everyone on their own platform to buy into is a legit event, the cycling public are even more disparaging of it.


Simple things like points and elimination races in-game don’t need any further testing or experimentation. It’s just simply not what Zwift focussed on. It does feel like this may be changing a bit with the PD4 work, braking, steering, rankings etc which are all really racing functionality. Prior to this, I can think of practically nothing that was added to racing since time trial mode. Maybe Crit City, if you can count a map.


Boost mode! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

  • that is still there :rofl:

If it would improve Zwift racing then I would say it is worth it. But currently it seem like the UCI events use the basics of Racing.

I would like to see armature racing do the same as the pro’s in the same time frame so that we can also experience the hype of the UCI. I may watch the pro’s if I have a vested interest. Like seeing how they race compared to my race.

1 Like

:rofl: There must be someone who was in that meeting that day who championed the decision who hangs their head in shame every time it gets mentioned.

Hanging-head-in-shame GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

1 Like